Units look very nice, although I’m still not sold on unique pieces for AA guns, something standard for everyone. Why not make unique IC’s for each country in mark-3, after they start making ICs again…
Still, maybe this bodes well for better Italian units in the future instead of reusing Germany’s…
that’d be great, more reason to buy another copy or 3 for the extra pieces… dang!
Hey All,
Our group has gotten a chance to play several rounds of this game now and I have to say that this a GREAT GAME!! In soo many of the games Italy gets a pretty glossed over look, whether you talk about Italy as a power or just that section of the map, but here, now, finally we have a game that really shows the scope, scale, and desperation that not only the Allies fought for, but that the Axis did as well, determined to keep Italy from being the ‘soft-underbelly’. Special units, from Tigers to the dreaded Fallschirmjager and the good old American Airborne all are pitted together in a desperate struggle for Italy.
We are working on a bit more detailed review to share here, but we quite enjoyed it. It blends the classic AA style with special units, territory details, and supply correlation at a scale that is useful for it (read- makes sense) and works for play. Patton or Smiling Albert, bring on the FMG Italy units and Italy is the battle ground!
I think that some of these territories are getting way too crowded with pieces already (even in the big 40s maps) so I’d limit it to like a heavy and a light fortification, like the blockhouse for the light, so it could be defensive, and then something like the singapore guns for heavy that could fire back.
I also like the idea of just one piece type that could be stackable for heavier defenses, no attack. As cool as more pieces are, there is something to be said for one piece that could stand for a couple things like the coastal or interior forts
guys STOP ASKING DUMB QUESTIONS LIKE " WHEN ARE…… or ANY UP DATES…" HE WILL TELL US
so you are saying that asking isn’t a sign of preparedness? :roll:
I agree on the carrier remarks; ascetically, it is very nice for them to fit easily onto the carriers. I have stopped using the US and JAP tacs and replaced them with the older alternate versions of the fighters from earlier games because I got tired of having to get the pieces ‘just right’ to stay on while they were moved or the board was bumped ever so slightly…
looking forward to all the pieces FMG! Great stuff!
Cool hope we get some setups and rules for this one 8-)
About another month and I will have setups and rules for this. Trying to start playtesting this next weekend!
very nice!
any chance of a larger version of the map to look at while you tweak the rules and setup? be happy to look try out a few things and give feedback.
lol…
i thought it was in the forum guidelines that arguing with IL was akin to hoping into quicksand when surrounded by crocodiles. It won’t end well for you either way… 
Tanks defending at 2 and still costing 6 is pretty bad, but now we have to be prepared to fight off the rule ‘change’ of fighters attacking at 3 unless paired with an Infantry as spotter to increase them to 4!
woo-hoo! just being facetious, couldn’t resist! :roll: 
Should have made them in the United States.
Not sure anyone would want to pay $69.99 per set rather than $29.99. Thats just the reality.
Well, on the one hand, people do pay outrageous amounts for something called, ‘1st Class’, because time is so important. $70 for quickly delivered and quality goods could be worth it…
On the other hand, whose to say that the factory in the US or Canada or wherever is guaranteed to not have the same delays or problems that this one has had. And how many seats are ‘1st Class’ on flights anyhow? Is it the vast majority? Uhhh, no.
While waiting isn’t always fun, I believe that FMG will continue to bring a quality product to market that will be worth this wait and these problems will likely be corrected for future releases.